"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Mittens loves himself some socialized medicine, whether it’s Romneycare, which he imposed, or Obamacare, which he won’t repeal.

is pure balderdash.

Willard Mitt is going to do precisely what he said he will do: repeal ObamaCare. Now, there may be some bickering and arguing over ‘oo plooked ‘oo when RomBamaCare rolls out in steamroller fashion to flatten some liberty near and dear to you. I get that.

The Mittnistry of Truth insists that you look elsewhere, and refuse to notice the near total correlation of the totally new hotness of the impending RomBamaCare with the old and busted ObamaCare. All of the acronyms have been changed, so RomBamaCare is a totally different thing.

Let’s have an end to these wildly inaccurate mis-statements about RomBamaCare. While we’re at it, let’s have an end to concerns about liberty, private property, and freedom of expression. Those noises all sound like Hate Speech to Mitt’s MoT.

Comments

While I laughed at this Drudge picture and links (mine mirrors what he has now on this post), and while I do think think Newt is a great conservative, I have my doubts Mitt has any conservatism left in him (if he ever had it). This is just about winning and power. Throwing Allen West under the bus was a bad mistake.

Pathfinder's wife January 29th, 2012 @ 6:51 pm

And this pre-owned BMW only had one previous owner, a little old lady from CA!

Somehow I’m just not wanting to buy what Mitt’s got to sell — at least Newt’s lunar dune buggy is sold “as is” (thus you feel it’s easier to walk away from it). That uneasy feeling regarding the Beamer is harder to shake.

So you are saying that Romney arranged the reforming of the Florida redistricting laws with Marco Rubio starting two years ago in the Florida legislature, before West was ever elected, just to screw him once he got in?

If that’s not what you are saying, then you need to redraw the map to show me HOW you conform with the law and add two districts without adding more Democrats to the 22nd, since it is surrounded with Democratic areas?

Here’s the map – get to work! (OR, you could just stop repeating stupid conspiracy lies you read on the internet without checking facts).

Mitt will never be president, so the whole thing is moot anyway. And yes, Adjoran, I believe Mitt would veto a straight repeal, but he wouldn’t get a straight repeal because his whole approach would be “working with Congress to keep the “good” parts of Obamacare”. He said as much, repeatedly, until the mood of the electorate forced him to start lying. He’d veto it ostensibly for just that reason, undoubtedly saying that he doesn’t want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

No we’re saying repeal will be held up for years through parliamentary maneuvers and in the meantime Romney will appoint moderate judges who will uphold ObamaRomneyCare. Cos that’s what suckass moderates do.

SteveM January 30th, 2012 @ 12:59 am

>”Mittens loves himself some socialized medicine”

I’m sure Bill Quick is a heck of a nice guy. But he doesn’t seem like the sharpest knife in the drawer.

>”Obamacare, which he won’t repeal.”

Yeah, case in point. Unless Quick is trying to say that, if and when a GOP Congress passes a repeal bill, Romney will VETO that bill.

But that just gets us back to hm not being too quick.

SteveM January 30th, 2012 @ 1:10 am

>”Throwing Allen West under the bus was a bad mistake.”

You seem to be a trifle unhinged. I doubt very much that Romney even knows who Allen West is, or would care if he did know.

It was begun before there was a West, the seat was held by a Democrat. It’s a good reform, eliminating most gerrymandering, and was approved by referendum, by the voters. Were they all in the conspiracy against West, too?

I know you aren’t the only one “questioning this” but NONE of you are willing to suggest an alternative way to lawfully redraw 25 districts into 27 new ones without putting more Democrats into the 22nd. Why is that?

Because it damn well CANNOT be done, the district is in the middle of Democrats. So the dreaded “establishment” is blamed for not doing the impossible.

But this isn’t in the real world. The current Supreme Court will decide the fate of ObamaCare – how many did Romney appoint?

As to “moderate judges,” are you aware the Governor of Massachusetts doesn’t nominate judges? He appoints one of three nominated by a panel of the legislature (85%+ Democrat) and cannot choose but from those three. So how many conservatives do YOU suppose the MA legislature proposed?

It is easy to make such mistakes with incomplete information, and unfortunately the conservative side of the blogosphere isn’t as much the stickler for fact-checking anymore. Pro-Gingrich sites aren’t at all reliable, many a once-dependable blogger like Jim Hoft will now resort to distortion to attack those who criticize Newt.

The Senate is the key (the House already passed repeal once, and will again). Either we must win 60 seats, a large order, or enough to intimidate a few of the 23 Democrats up for reelection in 2014 into voting for cloture. Alternatively, we could rig some “reconciliation” package like Reid did to pass it in the first place.

It is absolutely absurd to believe ANY Republican President would veto repeal of ObamaCare by a Republican Congress. Even if he wanted to, it would poison the relationship with Congress for the rest of his term and agenda.

It’s insane to even suggest such a thing. How can you condemn Romney on the one hand for his political pragmatism and on the other suggest he is so doctrinaire as to veto repeal? But if you want to hate the guy, maybe the facts aren’t all that important.

You are welcome to your own opinion of me. I have criticized all of the candidates at one time or another, except maybe Buddy Roemer. If he rose high enough, I’d find something to douse the irrational fires of passion for him.

My early critiques of Romney didn’t catch on – I see his real weakness as environmental squishiness, an epidemic among corporate types, but there was plenty of other ordnance sent his way. In turn, I’ve pointed out the weaknesses of every subsequent frontrunner, I hope positively in the most part.

But not Newt. He’s stabbed me and other conservatives in the back too many times. In many ways he is worse about that than John McCain because he had more to take away, and did. He’s not fit to be President, and can’t possibly get through the campaign without several Newtonian implosions. The verdict was in on this guy 16 years ago.

And besides your imagination, what is the basis of your opinion Romney has said he wants to repeal it in its entirety, and would first immediately grant waivers to every state? Or are you asserting these are all lies?

Look, I appreciate there has to be a candidate for those of low moral character and Newt has that following. So if you’re making up stuff to be like Newt, I understand.

Don’t be too hard on Quick – he was one of the pioneers, one of the first great bloggers. Supporting Gingrich requires a huge leap into faith that everything in his record means something else. Most of those supporting him now are doing it just because they see him as “the” Not Romney candidate, and are willing to forget what they know to believe it.

K-Bob January 30th, 2012 @ 4:13 am

The path to total repeal isn’t going to be easy. Some republicans will balk, as will most Dems. Getting a repeal bill through congress will require heroic arm twisting of LBJ proportion.

I do not doubt that Romney would sign a repeal bill. He’s put himself in a corner on that one.

However, I have serious doubts he would apply even the sort of pressure “W” used with congress to shepherd it through. As in “none.”

I even have reservations about Newt coughing up the football before waddling across the goal line. But I have more faith in Newt than Romney. I’d rather Santorum were the nominee, but Newt is at least a “fallback” choice. Romney is not.

So whoever this dude is, it was badly stated, but the odds are in his favor, for sure. It’s the wrong risk at the wrong time.

K-Bob January 30th, 2012 @ 4:19 am

That’s getting to be the most overused line of this primary season. If it had any power once, it’s certainly gone (now that we’re down to one decent candidate, one flawed candidate, one unacceptable candidate, and one phony candidate).

What if your wrong? What if this court doesn’t put an end to ObamaCare? What kind of judges will Romney appoint? Will he appoint judges like Thomas, or will his appointments by more alone the lines of a Souter, a Kennedy, etc? This is the most important question of this election, at least it is to me. If Romney could look the cameras and thus us straight in the eye and tell us he will unapologetically appoint a no-nonsense constitutional conservative to the bench, and give an example of who he would appoint, one who would be acceptable to me, then I might change my mind.

But after all this bullshit I’ve been hearing from the people claiming we need to reach out to moderates, independents and Democrats, how could that possibly translate into the appointment of a constitutional conservative jurist?

And by the way, who was the three-person panel who told him he had to support gun control? An assault on the 2nd Amendment is an assault on the foundation of the Constitution itself.

Nobody “wants” to hate him, Adj, but the guy has an undeniable history. Just who the hell told him he absolutely had to run for office in Massachusetts to begin with. With his money and resources there are plenty of other states he could lived in long enough to qualify. New Hampshire, for example, or Michigan. Why the hell Massachusetts?

Oh believe you me, Romney knows who Allen West is. Like all Establishment RINOs he might *wish* he’d never heard of him, but take my word for it, he knows who he is. He knows all too damn well.

Pathfinder's wife January 30th, 2012 @ 11:20 am

I can tell.

Pathfinder's wife January 30th, 2012 @ 1:09 pm

Oh, and by the way:
Don’t worry your pretty little head there sugar pie…I already said I’d vote against Valerie Jarrett, and I keep my word.

If Mr. Purdy is the canidate (and the GOP can convince me that they will think long and hard about foregoing the progressive BS, or no really great third party canidate comes along to tempt me), then I’ll be voting for him.
But right at the moment I seem to be getting doused in vinegar by a lot of GOPers because I’m not thinking exactly along their lines, and you know what they say about the great vinegar/molasses debate….and individual liberty/freedom of thought…let’s not forget that either.